[ih] Secret precedence schemes back then

[Scott Brim]

Excerpts from David Mills on Wed, Jan 28, 2009 04:06:15PM +0000:
> Scot,
>
> I'm not aware of the 108-router boundary; I was afraid that the EGP  
> packet would grow to become fragmented and the unfuzzies would croak.  
> Having been victims of SATnet, the fuzzies could fragment and  
> reassemble, but not every other critter could. The dropdead packet size  
> was 1500 octets in respect the then Ethernet max. However, the fuzzies  
> died before that happend and the IBM/MCI era ensued with BGP..
>
> Dave

What I'm remembering was when the mail gateways ran out of memory to
hold routes.  It was somewhere around 108.


>
> Scott Brim wrote:
>
>> Excerpts from Louis Mamakos on Wed, Jan 28, 2009 09:52:47AM -0500:
>>  
>>
>>> It's probably a little hard to imagine, but budgets and process were
>>> difficult at the time, and the community took up a collection to
>>> replace the LSI-11/23 CPU boards in those BBN routers with the fancy
>>> new LSI-11/73 CPUs!  I know that we at UMD "lent" a CPU board or two,
>>> as did some others at the time.
>>>    
>>>
>>
>> Was that when we crossed the 108 routes boundary?
>>
>>  
>>